HCO PL 16 April 65RA:
All Divisions Handling the Public Individual

Below are excerpts from a policy letter,``All Divisions Handling the
Public Individual,'' showing that it is Hubbard's intent that raw meat
who enter Scientology be controlled from the outset. They must not be
allowed to act on their own determination. ``The moral is very
plain. Never ask anyone in the public or field to Decide or Choose.''

Comments by Dave Touretzky appear indented, in italics.

Special note to Scientology lawyers: material from the original
HCO PL is reproduced here under the ``fair use'' provision of the US
Copyright Code. Learn to live with it.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 APRIL AD15
Gen Non-Remimeo Issue III
REISSUED 24 DECEMBER 1978
CORECTED AND REISSUED 14 OCTOBER 1985
(Cancels HCO PL 16 Apr 65RA, Issue III,
ALL DIVISIONS)
ALL DIVISIONS
HANDLING THE PUBLIC INDIVIDUAL
We have learned the hard way that an individual from the public must never
be asked to DECIDE or CHOOSE.
Examining experiences we have had, I finally saw there was a hidden datum
we had not been aware of in our orgs and particularly in handling the public.
I finally dug it up and here it is:
TO DECIDE ONE HAS TO UNDERSTAND.
Examining our big org chart, you can see quite plainly that Understanding
is higher than the point of public entrance into processing.
Example: Mr. J is offered Particle A. He can accept it just because it is
offered. He does not have to even perceive it or talk about it or recognize
any condition. He needs to see only two things: (a) that it is being offered
by somebody or something (source), and (b) that Particle A exists. All you
have to do is show him where to obtain it and that it exists. This is
acceptance without decision. Therefore he can have it.

``Acceptance without decision'' is mindless obedience. This is what
Hubbard strives for in his folowers. But he has to disguise his intentions,
so he offers a cover story about how giving people choices is equivalent to
confusing them.

Example: Mr. J is offered Particle A or Particle B. Now we have an
entirely different situation. Mr. J must compare Particle A and Particle B
in order to see which is best. Therefore he must see where each comes from
(source), that each exists, establish the condition of each particle,
communicate with and about them, perceive them, relate them to each other
(become oriented), understand them, be enlightened and finally decide
(establish own purpose). If he can do this Mr J can choose which he
should have, A or B. If Mr. J can't do all these things, Mr. J is
overwhelmed, gets confused and takes neither. One has asked Mr. J to jump
up a lot of levels. Actually the ordinary Mr. J's when raw meat and even
not so raw would have to have a Grade IX Certificate to obtain a Grade I
Certificate. And that of course is impossible.

The unstated premise in the above argument is that if one doesn't
already know enough to choose A or B at the moment the choice is
offered, then one cannot remedy the situation by asking intelligent
questions. This is obviously nonsense.

[... extraneous portion deleted ...]
The moral is very plain. Never ask anyone in the public or field to
Decide or Choose.
Erase from our org patter "Which do you want, Mr. J?" Don't ask which
course, or what pin or what book or which auditor or what door or what time
he or she wants to start anything or which door or which road or which
membership.

This type of domineering approach, associated especially with
Scientology ``registrars'' (the people who sign folks up for new
courses), turns many people off to Scientology even before they find
out about Xenu and the murdered space aliens.

Cultivate totally on a staff a didactic but pleasant approach. "Your
intensive starts..." "This is your next book...." "Your next course should
be taken on..." "Go to the third door." "I see you're a pc. You go up to
the second floor...."
Erase even the banal "What do you wish?" or "What can I do for you?"
as even that throws confusion into it.
[... additional examples deleted ...]
Just as you'd never ask a pc which command he wanted, you never ask the
public individual to decide.

``Which command he wanted'' refers to auditing commands given to
pre-clears (PCs). Auditors are expected to be in full control of
their pre-clears at all time. This directive is consistent with
Hubbard's view that ``raw meat'' public are not really people, but
machines under the control of ``circuits'' driven by engrams.
Basically, people are zombies, and one does not reason with a zombie;
one is free to take whatever measures are necessary to control it
until it can be woken up.

You can teach them anything, particularly the truth. But never ask them
to decide.
[... further rambling deleted ...]
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder